AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

FD-2022-00044	
					
SUMMARY: 

The applicant was discharged on 9 May 2007 in accordance with AFI 36-3208 with a General discharge for Misconduct (Minor Infractions).  The applicant appealed for an upgrade of his discharge characterization.

The applicant requested the board be completed based on a records only review.  The applicant was not represented by counsel.

The attached examiner’s brief (provided to applicant only), extracted from available service records, contains pertinent data regarding the circumstances and character of the applicant’s military service. 

DISCUSSION:  The DRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an applicant’s discharge, is authorized to change the characterization of service and the narrative reason for discharge if such changes are warranted.  If applicable, the board can also change the applicant’s reenlistment eligibility code.  In reviewing discharges, the board presumes regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the applicant.  The Board completed a thorough review of the circumstances that led to the discharge and the discharge process to determine if the discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety.  

The applicant’s record of service included an Article 15, a vacation of suspended nonjudicial punishment, and multiple Letters of Reprimand and Counseling.  His misconduct included:  failure to go, dereliction of duty, failure to follow orders, and failure to pay a debt.  

The applicant contended his superiors did not exercise every available option in terms of finding the cause of his behavior.  He claimed he was depressed and was forced into a career he didn’t want.  He further claimed he was retained in the same work section the entire time at his duty station and did not receive any additional training.

A review of the applicant’s record revealed he had multiple instances of misconduct during his time in the service.  His misconduct mainly included failure to go and failure to follow orders.  He received multiple Letters of Reprimand and Counseling, was punished under Article 15, UCMJ and had his suspended punishment vacated.  

Due to evidence of a mental health condition found in the applicant’s medical record, the Board considered the case based on the liberal consideration (LC) standards required by guidance from the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness and 10 USC §1553.  The Board included a member who is a physician, clinical psychologist, or psychiatrist.  Specifically, the Board reviewed the four questions the Under Secretary of Defense provided that boards should consider when weighing evidence in requests for modification of discharges due in whole or in part to mental health conditions, including post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD); Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI); sexual assault, and sexual harassment.  The Board considered the following: 

1. Did the veteran contend that a condition or experience may have excused or mitigated their misconduct or discharge?  
The applicant contended his superiors did not exercise every available option in terms of finding the cause for his behavior while enlisted.  

2. Did that condition exist/experience occur during military service? 
The applicant contended he was depressed and felt his hand was forced into a career he did not enlist for. There is evidence the applicant was evaluated by mental health prior to his time in corrective custody and subsequently he was referred to the Life Skills Clinic.  There is evidence the applicant was seen in the Life Skills clinic during his time in service and received a diagnosis of adjustment disorder with depressed mood.  

3. Does that condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? 
The applicant was discharged due to minor disciplinary infractions with 10 documented incidents of misconduct.  The applicant’s EPR also noted he was documented late for duty 21 times during the rating period.  The burden of proof is on the applicant to substantiate his claim.  The applicant did not provide any information or records to establish a nexus between his in-service mental health condition and the misconducts for which he was discharged.  Based on a review of the available records, and the written testimony submitted by the applicant, there is no evidence the applicant’s mental health condition caused or mitigated his discharge. 

4. Does that condition or experience outweigh the discharge? 
Because there is no evidence the applicant’s condition mitigated or excused his discharge, his discharge is also not outweighed. 

Additionally, the Board considered the factors laid out in the attachment to the Under Secretary of Defense memorandum, Guidance to Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Regarding Equity, Injustice, or Clemency Determinations, dated 25 June 2018, known as the “Wilkie Memo.”  The Board considered the factors listed in paragraphs (6)(a)-(6)(l) and paragraphs 
(7)(a)-(7)(r) of this memorandum and did not find any evidence of error or impropriety.

The DRB determined that, through the administrative actions taken by the chain of command in this case, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior.  The board concluded the negative aspects of the applicant’s service outweighed the positive contributions he made during his Air Force career.

FINDING:  The DRB voted unanimously to deny the applicant’s request to upgrade his discharge characterization to Honorable.  The DRB also voted unanimously to deny changing the discharge narrative reason to Secretarial Authority, and changing the reenlistment eligibility code to 2C or 3K.
 
CONCLUSION:  After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s issues, summary of service, service/medical record entries, and discharge process, the Board found the discharge was proper. Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall remain, the narrative reason for separation shall remain, and the reentry code shall remain.  The AFDRB results were approved by the board president on 6 May 2022.  If desired, the applicant can request a list of the board members and their votes by writing to:  

Air Force Review Boards Agency
Attn: Discharge Review Board
3351 Celmers Lane
Joint Base Andrews, NAF Washington, MD 20762-6602  
Instructions on how to appeal an AFDRB decision can be found at 
https://afrbaportal.azurewebsites.us

Attachment:
Examiner's Brief (Applicant Only)